Yet it is difficult to determine the effectiveness of such sanctions. The African continent is already familiar with the imposition of economic sanctions on countries that do not respect the rule of law. For example, the Central African Republic, Mali, Mauritania, and Madagascar were hit with sanctions in recent years after power was seized in coups d'état. These countries then faced major difficulties in emerging from the political impasse and resuming international cooperation. But did these economic sanctions influence their return to constitutional rule?

The lessons of history cast doubt on the efficacy of economic sanctions. Let us remember that the military boycott of apartheid South Africa never stopped the country from buying weapons, that the divestment campaigns and consumer product boycotts didn't cause the collapse of the ruling class, and that the big banks are, in large part, still present.

The case of Madagascar

Madagascar was hit with economic sanctions immediately after Andry Rajoelina seized power in March 2009 with the support of part of the army. After the suspension of trade agreements with the United States via the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and the suspension of aid from the European Commission and various other development agencies, the country's GDP fell rapidly, reaching its lowest level since 2002:

[4]

GDP of Madagascar between 2001 and 2011. Public domain

Learning of the AGOA's withdrawal, economist William Easterly argued [5][en] at the time that the sanctions did not penalize the leaders responsible for the situation, but rather the already fragile population:

The US pulled the plug on AGOA at the end of December and import duties of up to 34 percent were reintroduced. Now we are starting to see the effects in the formal and informal economy:

Factories closing and factory jobs lost

Increased competition among street traders now that former factory workers are pushed out to sell goods in overly crowded street markets

Knock-on effects in neighboring countries (Mauritius, Swaziland, Lesotho, South Africa) which made inputs like zippers to Madagascar’s factories.

Among the effects we are NOT seeing: signs of increased interest in arriving at a power-sharing agreement or instating democratic governance on the part of Rajoelina’s government.

The ensuing chain of events would prove Easterly right. Madagascar plunged into a deep economic crisis, while those responsible for the political crisis were unaffected, remaining in power for five years after the coup d'état. New 4X4s proliferate in certain towns, inhabited by a small wealthy minority[6], while the majority of the population rapidly grows poorer.[7] In 2013, 90 percent of Madagascans were living on less than two US dollars per day.

The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the Malian minister for humanitarian action issued a final report on the impacts of the crisis. The report was unambiguous on the negative impact[10] of the sanctions on the country's economy and its dependence on development aid:

The economic sanctions include two elements: the suspension of development aid by the technical and financial partners, and the economic embargo imposed by the Economic Community of West African States[13]:

The consequences of these events have been revealed through the following conditions:

- the suspension of cooperation with partners;
– the decline in activity (investment, production, bank, commercial, import/export, inflation);
– the decline in the population's buying power through the increase in the consumer price index, and the loss of confidence of economic agents (uncertainties);
– the decline in budgetary revenues (budget revisions, etc.);
– the decline in spending on social sectors (the Strategic Framework for Growth and Poverty Reduction and the [United Nations’] Millennium Development Goals, etc.).

[…] One of the key lessons of the political and security crisis lies in Mali's great dependence on its foreign relations. […]

Once again, the imposed sanctions penalized the already fragile local population. These sanctions did not result in a return to good government, as external military intervention was necessary to stabilize the country.

It appears that the international community has learned from these events. The recently proposed sanctions against Russia seem more targeted towards the leaders at fault.

However, unanswered questions remain regarding the reasons that motivate the imposition of sanctions on certain countries. The economic interests of countries seem to be significant factors in the way these decisions are approached by the international community.